Re: [PATCH v2] CODING_STYLE.rst: flesh out our naming conventions.

[Philippe Mathieu-Daudé]

Hi Alex,

On 8/10/20 12:51 PM, Alex Bennée wrote:
> Mention a few of the more common naming conventions we follow in the
> code base including common variable names and function prefix and
> suffix examples.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
> 
> ---
...
> +Function Naming Conventions
> +---------------------------
> +
> +The ``qemu_`` prefix is used for utility functions that are widely
> +called from across the code-base. This includes wrapped versions of
> +standard library functions (e.g. qemu_strtol) where the prefix is
> +added to the function name to alert readers that they are seeing a
> +wrapped version; otherwise avoid this prefix.
> +
> +If there are two versions of a function to be called with or without a
> +lock held, the function that expects the lock to be already held
> +usually uses the suffix ``_locked``.

And if there is only one version? I'm looking at:

  /* With q->lock */
  static void nvme_kick(NVMeQueuePair *q)
  {
  ...
  }

Should the style be enforced here and this function renamed
nvme_kick_locked()?

In this particular case, I think so, because we also have:

  /* With q->lock */
  static void nvme_put_free_req_locked(...)
  {
  ...
  }

  /* With q->lock */
  static void nvme_wake_free_req_locked(NVMeQueuePair *q)
  {
  ...
  }

For more cases:

$ git grep -A1 -i '\/\*.*with.*lock'